Audeze LCD-X Review

You may know from what I have written before that I have been waiting for LCD-3 for a while now.

A few weeks ago, I managed to get my hands on pair of LCD-3 and I was really happy about it. At last, together with my HD800 I have the best of all the music genres.

I got it on Wednesday and Friday and I thought I would have some time at last to get acquainted to my new LCD-3. While driving home I heard my phone whistling that I have new mail. I looked at it and saw “NewAudeze Lcd-X“. I smiled and thought a friend was trying to pull a prank on me.

When I got home I saw that it was no joke. Headfi had already a thread dedicated to LCD-X and a few guys describing their first impressions about it. My jaw was on the floor. I just bought LCD-3.

Ok…. I knew that in audio world it takes a few good years before a new flagship was due to appear.

Nobody knew the place the LCD-X was going to take on the market. Was it going to be better than the 3? Some people were already stating that LCD-X was better!?

I got a little depressed, as I just bought the LCD-3, but on the other hand I was happy as I really think that this industry needs faster progress. But what about my wallet? Well… I have been through this before. The first thing you are tempted to do is to enter a wallet defense state, ignoring the possibility of the newer product being better than what you have.

I like to think that I got to be more objective than that, so I got pass that state, and I focused on the possibility of listening to the new product and share my honest impressions.

I would like to thank Sankar, Mark and Audeze support on their fast responses, and the opportunity they gave me to listen and review the LCD-X.

Audeze LCD-X Review

I don’t know if you guys are aware of this, but one of the reasons I started the blog is because of Audeze LCD-2 and the impact those headphones and Audeze had on me. I absolutely fell in love with them and had to write about it.

When I heard LCD3 for the first time, the wallet defense system activated as they didn’t seem to make a huge difference from LCD-2 to my ears. Meanwhile I have discovered HD800 which made me understand better the dynamics, micro-dynamics, transients, details, layering, etc. After that , I understood the value brought by LCD-3 and heard the big difference between the two from a more educated perspective.

Audezewill always have a special place in my heart as they really got me much deeper into this hobby. I just love how they can can take you from your life and make you enter the euphonic world of music. Who is Audeze? If you ask a old audiophile, he would probably evade the answer as he doesn’t know much about it. I love what Audezedid in such short time! When did they start? A few years ago. What did they do? Well, the answer is simple: a lot, in a very short time:

Produced world class products that compete with the best headphones in the world and companies that have decades of experience behind them

Didn’t stop R&D as they are continuously trying to improve their products and bring the best on the market and did a good job from my perspective

Considering the above, I was very, very anxious to hear their new products, Audeze LCD-X and XC, and I chose to put my efforts into the X as I like open headphones much more than closed ones, so here we are.

I have seen a lot of very happy and psyched opinions on headfi about LCD-X , some users saying that the LCD-X are even better than LCD-3. I have tried to keep my hype to the minimum and hold my thoughts on LCD-X until they reach a mature state.

However, I now understand the general hype on headfi. LCD-X, while still not better than LCD-3, it brings some very exciting stuff over it to the table. They sound different, and different in a good way, presenting the opportunity to attract new fans, fans that would appreciate them more than LCD-3, while others would still prefer LCD-3. I am not going to compare them to LCD-2 as the X are quite better from all points of view.

LCD-X has new technology called Fazor which gives an efficiency of 96 dB/ 1 mW compared to LCD-3 that has 91 dB/ 1 mW. LCD-X also has a smaller impedance of 22 ohms. This makes them much easier to drive and my FIIO E17 proved that.

The Fazor part prevents the delays from the sound that is produced by the positioning of the magnets in front of the membrane, creating an uniform sound-wave leading to better instrument separation and imaging because due to fewer distortions .

Looks & Build Quality

I was counting the days to hear these babies. When they reached my home, I barely stopped myself from tearing the package apart, to get to them faster. The packaging is the same as with LCD-2 coming in the same sturdy travel case. The headphones look very nice and have a very good build quality.

Audeze replaced the wood with metal this time, but the they still have style and very good finishes. Even if they may be a little heavy for some, they have almost the same comfort as LCD-3 from my perspective. LCD-3 has 548 g and LCD-X has 600.

If you liked the looks on the older models, I am sure you will like and enjoy the new looks of LCD-X.

Actually they feel even more sturdy than the previous models. You don’t have to worry about the wood and the wood care any longer.

You may already think that we had talked enough and didn’t get to what it really matters, the sound. So let’s get down to business.

Audeze LCD-X Review

Sound Impressions

You know the drill. We will get through some impressions one some songs and then conclude impressions on portions of sound and overall.

Wow…the voice…is just awesome. It has a lot more presence than LCD-3. The sound seemed like it opened up from the 3. All the upper mids & treble were more in front and I am saying that in a good way.The trumpet was just amazing as it had excellent texture, feel and presence, the piano was clearer and crispier. The drums were faster and had more impact.

Does Audeze know how to rock? You know it does! But does the new model stand up as the older brothers? Hell yes! It is still an Audeze headphone! I feel that LCD-X has a better and neutral balance than the older siblings. However it seems to be faster, with more bass impact and better PRAT . All the sound is binding together in a very good harmony. I cannot say that the mids are recessed, that the bass needs something more or the treble is too bright or not present. No…it is just as it should be. The voice was always between the instruments, playing through them, without getting lost between them as it had very good texture, feel and presence.

Again, the first impression was that the sound opened. There was a lot of air on top. The voice was again much more present than on LCD-3. The treble was more forward, pleasant and detailed without being bright. The drums were fast and with good impact.

This song has amazing bass and sub bass. Is this still an Audeze headphone? Yes, of course, it still has the house signature. However, the bass was not as meaty, as LCD-3, but it had more impact and still went very deep. The sound seemed faster and the bass more controlled with a better punch. Again, it gave more air on top than LCD-3. Some details on upper mids and treble are more obvious on LCD-X.

I liked the bass on LCD-3 more on this song as it had more body and the guitars from the beginning had more texture and extension, but LCD-X did a very good job as well as it had a faster in your face sound and better PRAT with better instrument separation and imaging. The bass didn’t had so much body but it was faster and had more punch.

I just love the voices with LCD-X. They have a whole new presence than with LCD-3. All the upper mids and treble are more forward , not recessed as with the 3, making you rediscover your music. The voice integrates a lot better throughout the instruments and the song with LCD-X. The guitars had better extension with LCD-3 but the instrument separation was better with LCD-X.

It has been one of the rare moments when the treble fascinated me. LCD-X has an amazing treble. It is more forward and better integrated balance wise in the song adding air on top. The flute was amazing and it played effortless throughout the song. I have never heard such clean and transparent treble with no sign of sibilance or brightness.

I think this song slapped me back to reality. I thought that LCD-3 had a wider soundstage at first, due to a more laid back sound, but knowing the size of the cathedral I can now say that LCD-X has better soundstage than the elder brother. The height of the soundstage and the voice separation are amazing with it. The chorus is a pleasure to listen to and it fills the scene with an incredible presence and transparency.

Summary

Bass

This is still an Audeze headphone. It has amazing bass. It seems to be faster than the LCD-3, with more impact but less body. I love both presentations, and I didn’t decide yet which one is better as both are different and very good.

Mids

Even though LCD-X doesn’t have all the magic LCD-3 has in the mids, they have better clarity and the upper mids are more present and more enjoyable with LCD-X. When I said magic I was referring to the instrument extension for example which is better with LCD-3. For example the guitar chords have a fuller life.

Treble

The treble here is very interesting and because of LCD-X, I started to be fascinated about it as it is more forward and present, giving a more balanced presentation to the sound. You cannot say about LCD-X that they are dark headphones like it’s brothers. It gives the music a sense of clarity and air on top. It is also very transparent and clean.

Voices

I just love voices with LCD-X and I consider this to be a very strong point for them. LCD-X brings the voices in front or actually they don’t put them in the back and they are not lost between the instruments like sometimes with LCD-3. After LCD-X, I found myself wanting to turn up the volume with LCD-3 to reach the same presence with the voices. LCD-X make the voices sound with amazing clarity.

Openness

I have chosen this word very carefully. Initially I was fooled by the more laid back sound of LCD-3 and considered it to have bigger soundstage than LCD-X. However LCD-X is more opened than LCD-3 with more air on top and better positioning. The height of the soundstage is amazing and in some ways the sound opens up even after HD800, the X having a taller soundstage.

Imaging & Instrument separation

Having faster transients, the instrument separation is very good. At first I thought LCD-3 has better instrument separation because of the more laid back sound and better instrument extension. However LCD-X betters the 3 here because the instruments are better contoured and their position are easier to pick because of this. The more I listened, the more I was astonished by the performance of LCD-X in this department.

Clarity & Transparency

The sound is very transparent and very clear on the whole spectrum. I feel that this is a very strong point of LCD-X and it really managed to impress me with it. The headphones become a window to the music.

Details

The X packs a lot of details in the whole audio spectrum, so the resolution is very good. LCD-3 has the upper hand here overall but not by much as the details are more apparent with LCD-X on the upper mids and treble .

Transients

I find the transients in LCD-X to be faster than LCD-3. The attack has more impact and the decays are faster. I love this about LCD-X. It gives more energy and PRAT to the music.

Neutrality

LCD-X seems to be more neutral and more natural than LCD-3 and LCD-2. However it still has the magic and fun Audeze headphones have.

Easy to drive

I have tried the LCD-X with both my Samsung Galaxy S4 and FiiO E17 and they performed very, very well compared to LCD-3.

Compared to LCD-3

Is this the new Audeze flagship? This is hard to decide, as both have very strong points, and I am sure there will be people preferring one before the other. However, the more I listen to LCD-X, the more I like it and it makes it very hard for me to decide between the two. I may find myself leaning in favor of LCD-X after a few more days or worse…I may love both, and that is not good for the wallet.

I have said several times that LCD-X has more air on top. The height of the soundstage is incredible and makes the sound open even after HD800 in some regards. Sometimes I felt that LCD-3 had a little more depth in the soundstage but I think that was because of the more recessed mids and treble, because of the longer decays and better instrument extension on LCD-3. And I do think that sometimes, on some songs LCD-3 can sound a little more spacious because of those aspects.

However, the instrument separation and imaging are amazing with LCD-X and are a step up over it’s older brother.

Also I find that the X has better transparency and clarity making the headphone a clean window to the music.

It is hard to decide between the bass from LCD-X and LCD-3. LCD-3 has more body, more weight and LCD-X has more impact and it is faster. I love both in this aspect but I find myself mostly preferring the meaty, more extended bass of LCD-3.

I feel that LCD-3 has better resolution overall, especially until the upper mids and treble, where the sound is more present in LCD-X and the details more apparent. With lcd-3 the instruments seem to have better extension living a fuller life.

However, the attack is more powerful on the X and the decays faster, leading to better transients and more energetic sound. So if the sound is composed by attack, extension and decay, the attack and decay are better on the X while the extension is a little better on LCD-3.

LCD-3 has a warmer, fuller, more organic and refined sound with better instrument extension which gives the magic to the sound while LCD-X brings some other very strong points discussed in the next section and still manages to keep the Audeze house sound.

Conclusions

(Edit)

Now all Audeze headphones have fazors, so the comparison with the LCD-3 from this review may be out of date.

Audeze really did some magic here from my perspective. They made the sound more neutral, very balanced overall, keeping the house signature, not loosing too much from the euphony and making them suitable for every music genre out there.

I found it sometimes hard to decide which of the two models I like more, but the more I listen to LCD-X the more I love it and I feel that it is technically superior to LCD-3.

I very much like the direction Audeze is heading with these new headphones and technology and I keep wondering if this is only a beginning of a new line of products.

LCD-X is proof that Audeze listens to it’s customers and respects their opinions. I feel like X marks the spot, in the essential places the fans said that LCD-3 could be improved.

I am torn apart between LCD-3 and LCD-X but I know something for sure: I could live happily with either of them. Even if at the moment I am inclined more and more to the X … I still love LCD-3 though. I’ve struggled for days to make a clear decision between the two and I couldn’t. Even if LCD-X retains the house signature, I bet some will want both as they can be complementary headphones.

My wallet ran away from home again…

Pros:

Fast bass with good punch & depth

Very good details

Excellent transients

Excellent instrument separation & Imaging

Very opened sound and very good soundstage with amazing height

Very good and clean treble, present with good texture without being bright

Post navigation

30 thoughts on “Audeze LCD-X Review”

I’ve left a starting spot open in my collection for an all star “open” set of cans.I’ve got my “closed” positions covered with the TH900 and the Lawton, (Denon modified) LA7000.Aside from deciding betweem the X and 3 , I’m hesitant to scoop a pair of the X’s so soon due to Audeze seeming to never roll out a headphone without them having initial issues.They get it right eventually, but it seems to awhile. I definitely feel I am destined to own an Audeze though.I do think it is the typical reaction of a listener to gravitate towards a headphone that is the “brighter” of the two , as long as it is a pleasant brightness.

I think Audeze is reaching a very good level of maturity. I didn’t find anything wrong with the sound of the LCD-X as others found with the first versions of LCD-3 which were veiled. LCD-X has the best treble I have heard until now in a high-end headphone (haven’t heard them all yet). While very present and detailed it isn’t bright or sibilant being very smooth and present to the ears.

Your description of the treble in the X reminds me of why I’m so in love with my TH900.I wonder if there have been any blind listening tests between the “X and 3″ From the reviews I have read many can’t help but let the price differential enter the equation of which is the better headphone.Logically we assume the more expensive (though not by much) is the better.

Great review! I read your comparison to the HD800 as well, and I’m still at a loss… So far the best headphone I know of on the market short of maybe the Stax SR009 is the HD800, which I’ve repeatedly tried to find headphones to compete with. But so far I haven’t really found any real competitors, apart from maybe the Fostex TH900.
So now I’m looking for a headphone to compliment the HD800, which the TH900 doesn’t do too badly, but in the end they are just too similar in presentation and overall sound (though the Fostex has ever so slightly less details and ofcourse a more bass heavy signature).
I’ve had the LCD-2 but found it to just lack too much detail to be acceptable, but just adore the build of the Audeze’s, so now I wonder wether the LCD-3 or the LCD-X will be the best partner for the HD800? I wanted a closed headphone, but the TH900 isn’t really closed since it leaks sound and doesn’t isolate, and the LCD-XC doesn’t sound like its even competitive from what I’ve heard of it so far…

Grrr…!

I listen to Metal, Ambient, Electronica, Classical, Symphomic and Folk/world. And I’m an absolute sucker for details and an enormous soundstage (hence the HD-800 love story). Though I find the HD800 to do nearly everything perfectly, it does sometimes leave me wanting a fuller, more bellowing sound. To give an example, the track Ayreon – Dawn of a Million Souls (worth a listen if you don’t know them.) The organ on the TH900 sends chills down my spine because I can almost feel the deep notes of the organ, where as the HD800 just renders it, but due to its somewhat scrutinous bass response it refuces to give that viceral experience, without the same feeling…

So as far as see the LCD-X is an obvious choice, but could you give any thoughts? And if I can lure you into doing me a slight favor, could you try and listen to the intro of the above mentioned track on the HD800 and LCD-X and describe the difference? It would be greatly appreciated!

I will always pick Audeze instead of HD800 on rock and metal, with the exception of some symphonic metal sometimes, but overall I would still pick LCD-3 .
I just found this youtube video, which I found to be kind of a bad recording : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_z4LTWvpOY&feature=kp

However, I think for this one LCD-3 would be the best. LCD-X had definitely better bass, body and slam, but the there are some cases when on some songs(here too), because of the bad mastering (where I think the upper midrange was brought more forward), it sounds a little off. On HD800 of course the soundstage depth, width position…excellent, etc but still too much energy on the treble and sibilance. Even though I don’t have LCD-3 right now, I am 100% sure I would pick it for this one!

Hmm, interesting… About the Audeze vs. Sennheiser for specific genres – Oh, and thanks a lot for taking the time to help. I’ve owned the LCD-3, but I’m pretty sure the one i had was either very veiled or had some other fault, though my general experience of it at the time maybe wasn’t too far off: basically i saw it as a very dark version of an HD800 without the soundstage, which to me at that point seemed ridiculous as it cost twice as much to aquire. Later on I had the LCD-2 and had somewhat better experience relative to its pricing, as it was nice to have it for more relaxed listening. That and the dark sound made it possible to listen to some music a little louder (or so it felt) making it sound a bit more powerful due to more low-end punch, without hurting my hearing…
What ultimately killed the LCD-2 in the end for me, was just the sheer lack of resolution and perceived detail. I miss it somehow though – partially just because of the solid build quality…

As for that track specifically it does seem to sound a bit off in that youtube video, but even so… Gives me something to work with, so again, thanks alot!

Hmm, I’ve been listening to the LCD-3 a lot now, and enjoying it quite a bit. My only actual problem is that the bass and lower mids somehow sound completely disconnected… They’re presented, but they seem to have no actual force behind them. With most other headphones bass can to a smaller or larger extent almost be felt, in some extreme cases actually make the headphone vibrate ever so slightly. However the LCD-3 does none of this, the bass sounds even less interesting than the HD-800… It goes lower and is possibly more accurate, but it completely fails to engage me – I’ve actually found myself getting bored with some tracks only to switch to another headphone or my speakers and find that the same music that just bored me suddenly has massive “force” behind it.
Is this something you have experienced? It seems pretty odd, and a bit worrisome to me considering that is the exact opposite of what I bought it for. I mean the HD-800 is not known for its bass-quantity even though i find it spot on most of the time, so if an HD-800 moves more air in the lower frequencies than the LCD-3 i must say I’m a bit confused… And annoyed since so far i quite like the LCD-3s sound which i didn’t really expect, but at times it can get plain boring to listen to somehow… At the moment this kinda overshines the things love about it a lot of the time, which makes me a bit sad :(
To take an example, the track I mentioned earlier by Ayreon barely sounds more powerful on the LCD-3 than the Sennheisers, they just fail to really make you feel the rumble of the organ, again there is no real power behind it, it seems like not much air is actually moved – its very strange because it clearly reproduces the low frequencies, but like the sennheiser, it sort of like it just informs you that there is an organ and it rumbles, without actually reproducing it…

Hmmm, LCD-3 should have a good attack too. HD800 is faster, but it shouldn’t be as you said. What amplifier and cables are you using with lcd3? I also noticed that adding some silver aftermarket cables like toxic silver widow improves the speed, attack and impact. LCD-3 needs a neutral, powerful and fast amplifier, so if you have something that is on the warm side or a little slower, it might not be the best combination with lcd-3. If the amplifier doesn’t have enough power, or has a big output impedance could lead to what you described.

I use a ALO Rx Mk3b, which has plenty of power to spare driving this – i know because it has driven much more requiring headphones before with no problem, an drew the LCD-2 with ease as well for that matter. And it is completely neutral, a bit analytical and grainy, has very strong attack, and a big soundstage.
At the moment I’m just using the stock cable with a balanced connector, but thats not going to change it, if anything it might even enhance the problem since the high frequencies are the ones suffering the most with bad conductors, so giving it a better cable will likely just increase the perceived lack of bass due to a slightly more present treble – I’m a cable maker myself, so I know :p I also use the same wire that is used for the silver widow, in fact the 99%silver 1%gold conductors are my favorite, but they wont save major problems like this one…

I think you should try a full sized desktop amplifier like Burson Soloist for example. No portable amplifier can compare to it from my experience. LCD-3 needs power and control. The bass was wonderful in my experience with it.

You need to DECREASE the bass output by cutting about -3-4dB at 50Hz by using the parametric equalizer in your music player. You will hear midrange clarity return with bass resolution and slam. Just do it. Resistance is futile.

In an unintended thinking moment an experienced reviewer discovered that he lives in the real world, rather than an imaginary one.
For way of explanation, the real world is what is; the imaginary world is the one we’d like it to be. Halgaard posted valid concerns herein that the veteran reviewer above addressed correctly, based on real world realities, not what one may want the world to be.

I used to own one (The burson that is), but to my surprise it didn’t sound better, it just had a slightly smaller soundstage that the Mk3b when driven balanced, so thats not the problem. I havent heard any amplifier that actually outperformed the Mk3b to an appreciable amount, and the one that did was way too expensive: the liquid gold – in fact all the desktop amps I’ve auditioned except that one were actually worse. Oh and with the Hifiman He-6 my speaker amp was better, but thats about it. And from the specs on it, the Mk3b should also have plenty of power to control the Audeze so I don’t think thats the problem. There arent any signs of being underpowered either: no lack of control, distortion or the like…
I talked to the people on the Changstar forum about it, and found that this is actually a fairly common experienc/opinion on that forum, so… Yea.. I think it just comes down to me expecting a “fun” and engaging headphone, instead it turned out to be a competitor to the HD800 rather than a polar opposite – mind you they don’t sound like eachother, they just both have a somewhat ‘serious’ presentation if you will, where as what I was looking for was probably more along the lines of a D7000 or TH900, without their faults (the sibilance, lacking mids and somewhat wobbly bass)…

That said the LCD-3 is a very good headphone… Just wasnt exactly what I was looking for it would seem. Now if I could find a really cheap D7000, so I could afford to keep all of them I’d be golden! But thats probably not very likely :P

Interesting. I get what you are saying. I have had the D7000 and liked them, but they weren’t in the same class. However, they were fun indeed.

I found LCD-3 to be so different compared to HD800 as sometimes it took me a while to get to accomodate.

After LCD-3, hd800 sounded thin and too bright…After HD800, lcd3 sounded congested and fuzzy. I couldn’t enjoy any of them if I would have kept changing them on each song. With LCD-X, the change is a lot less abrupt.

Definitely agree with that comparison – that is part of what ruined my first experience with the LCD-3 last time i owned it, this time I’m a bit more cautious with directly comparing them, so I can enjoy them more individually… Because to me HD800 is probably always going to win in the end, but that doesn’t change the fact that other headphones can be good on their own :)

And no, the D7000 in technicalities cant compare, though after some mods the crawl upwards, my old pair had custom made high gloss Ebony cups, lawton mod and later got an upgraded cable aswell. They were gorgeous… Martin Custom Audio still has pictures of them here: http://www.martincustomaudio.com/2011_09_04_archive.html
Actually tend to like their look better than the TH900 to be honest… That subtle grain in the black wood was something special! Hmm. Now I wan’t one again. This is a dangerous discussion xD

Now I’ve had the LCD-3’s for half a year or so and I’m really enjoying them, but I’m still considering trying the LCD-X… I’d have to sell the LCD-3 to do it though. If I’m going to hell this is what it’ll be like I’m sure – I’m swapping back and forth between my HD800 and LCD-3 trying to decide wether I can let the LCD-3 go or not. I want an LCD-3 with much more impact, but I’m afraid wether the LCD-X has enough detail to compete (since I find Audeze’s other models fail severely at this) and what if their mid range isn’t quite enough to stay a good complementary headphone to the HD800 without ending up as its “little brother” instead…
Darn it!!!

Yea, I considered it, but the only pair i could find at a reasonable price only ships to “Con US” so thats out of the question, and here they’re simply too expensive (They cost the equivalent of about 3000$ new here). But I can possibly get a near new LCD-X for the same I can sell my LCD-3C for, which is why I’m currently speculating so much…
Might just be a case of “the grass is greener on the other side” syndrome, or curiosity, but I kinda wanna try a pair… My fear is that they don’t live up to my expectations and then I’m also screwed. Sometimes I wish I lived somewhere where its actually possible to audition most brands like in some parts of asia :P
When I visited Thailand I just walked into a store and auditioned the Abyss headphones on a Liquid Gold amp.. Now thats how it should be ^^

After listening to the old lcd3 vs lcd-x a couple of days ago, I found lcd-x to be quite more transparent and clear sounding than the old lcd-3. It also has more impact and energy, while lcd-3c(old) sounded dull to me. I would definitely go with the x, but that is just me.

This may also be a result from me being used to lcd-x sound as well. However, lcd-3f from what I understood, gains in terms of transparency, impact-energy as well. I am quite curious about them . A friend of mine told me that the difference between 3f and 3c is similar to the difference between lcd 2 and lcd 3.

I will try to get my hands on a new pair of lcd-3f and make a comparison between the two. However, between lcd-x and the old lcd-3, now, I would definitely go with lcd-x for it’s cleaner and more energetic/punchier sound.

Finally! This one hit the mark – or at least very close to it! I could wish for more details (does’t quite match the LCD-3 or HD800) but apart from that, holey moley this headphone has an awesome presentation! The full bodied wall of sound I like from audeze, but now with actual physical presence and slam. Its not just nice sound (like with the LCD-3) but you can actually fell the impact and bass rumble at times…
From a objective standpoint I’d say its overpriced, considering it is handily beat by things like the HD800 and likely T1 and HE-6 on a technical standpoint. But subjectively speaking, having a sound signature and presentation as overwhelming as it does, might just be worth it! Wow. I might not even need to get a Denon alongside my Audeze now :P

Ah… Hello Headmania , I recently have just bought an LCD XC … it does sound great to me but there’s one technical problem that i wish to find out, and I really guess u guys here can explain me … what is the fazor technology ? A piece of metal or a magnetic ?

It is a piece of metal that helps the soundwaves move in a more uniform matter helping instrument separation & Imaging. Also, if I remember this correctly it also moves the membrane more efficiently, making the headphones easier to drive.

Considering I own a Chord Hugo DAC and its musical profile, what would you choose between the LCD-3 and LCD-X?? It is pretty tough to purchase one or the other without listening to them with the Hugo so looking forward to hear what you think! Great reviews by the way dude!